Re: [registrars] Fw: [council] Posting of Second Advisory ConcerningEquitable Allocation of Shared Registration System Resources

[Rick H Wesson <wessorh@ar.com>]

Ross,

On Sat, 11 Aug 2001, Ross Wm. Rader wrote:

> > > i would strongly suggest that the registrars form a "working group" led
> by
> > > our new CTO rick wesson to investigate the circumstances surrounding
> these
> > > actions described in the letter ... to wit:
> >
> > ok, I've already inquired with the registry on who their point person is,
> > no word yet. we'll do the discussion on the main list, no need to make a
> > spcial place for this discussion/group. Any registrar can contribute and
> > I'll summarize the current proposals before monday.
>
> Which Monday Rick? If it is the 13th that you are referring to, I'll have to
> respectfully disagree. If you are summarizing proposals, then it is
> important that you first solicit proposals, allow for their preparation and
> then summarize them. This is not something that can happen over the next 48
> hours. The fact is, the current "proposals" represent the thinking of a very
> limited cross-section of registrar representatives. We need to make sure
> that a broad range is represented.

Monday the 13th  is when I was going to have the various proposals that
have been posted to the registrars, and dnso lists. They are just ideas
posted, the CURRENT proposals as I stated above. Don't worry, your
viewpoint won't be left out.

This is the starting point, a document of the problem and the discussion
to date. VeriSign has not even gotten back to me with who and what
resources we have to work with so I don't know what kinds of data they
will provide.

> >
> > Since the registry can't/won't give us raw data, we can not do any real
> > analysis, we will probably be limited to social engineering. It is a
> > registrar behavior we want to change not a technology we need implemented.
> > We need the registry delete process changed so that the registrars can't
> > game the system by a behavior that looks to other registrars like a DoS
> > attack.
>
> Not sure that I completely agree. While the registry may or may not provide
> us with global data (have we asked?), the RC represents a tremendous
> resource unto itself. The operational experience and observations that we
> collectively possess may be enough to make up for any lack of hard data that
> the registry possesses.

I think the registry has taken the appropiate SHORT TERM steps to prevent
the behavior that is detremental to us all; however, we need to figure out
the long term solution. This is what I have been tasked with, driving the
process, not providing the solution.


-rick